The Campaign Against Antisemitism only gets away with their Lies because Press & Politicians Render Invisible the Thousands of Jews Who Take Part in the anti-Genocide Demonstrations
Sky News Extended Video Showed the Duplicity & Dishonesty of Falter
Gideon Falter’s attempt to play the ‘victim of anti-Semitism’ card ignominiously collapsed this week as he was shown to be a charlatan and a liar. Sky News video of his confrontation with the Police, unlike the carefully edited one the CAA released, shows that his claim of wanting to cross the road was a lie and that he was trying to walk into the march, with bodyguards, and provoke a confrontation.
Falter even dressed as a religious Jew for the occasion, complete with a yarmulke. If you look at Gideon Falter in his interviews it is noticeable that he is not wearing a head covering. See also Did an Israel Lobbyist Confect an Antisemitism Story About a Palestine Demo?
Falter was going out of his way to say ‘I am Jewish’ not for religious reasons but as a way of pretending that hostility to him was on account of his being Jewish rather than a supporter of genocide.
Even John Mann Criticised Gideon Falter
As the Guardian noted, in footage of the incident, Falter appeared to be accompanied by a security guard as he was confronted by police officers. When asked by an officer what his intentions were and how many people were in his group he said: “I’m just waiting for a couple of people and then we are planning to carry on our way.”
When asked to confirm that footage showed Falter accompanied by a security guard, the CAA said it couldn’t comment. In fact it seems that he was accompanied by a whole bevy of Israeli security.
The claims that the Palestine demonstrations in London were anti-Semitic or that Jews were afraid to go near them falls down on one simple fact. Thousands of Jewish people have taken part in them. No one has been attacked. We have always been welcomed on the march.
Ben Jamal of PSC and Falter Discuss The Failed Scam
As the Guardian reported ‘
a group representing Holocaust survivors, who attended the same pro-Palestinian demonstration as Falter, disputed his claim that the march was a no-go zone for Jews.
The group, which included Stephen Kapos, a Holocaust survivor from Budapest, and four other child survivors, said in an email:
“Throughout [Falter’s] interactions with the police, we were standing only a few yards away from him, yet we experienced nothing but warmth and solidarity from the pro-Palestine demonstrators and not a hint of antisemitism.
“Our group was ‘openly Jewish’ in that we all wore placards saying that, as descendants of Holocaust survivors, we oppose the ongoing genocide in Gaza.
“Every major pro-Palestine demonstration in London has included a large Jewish bloc which has received nothing but support and warmth from their fellow demonstrators.”
The Guardian only printed excerpts from the press release. The original is below:
It has been widely reported that Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was threatened with arrest when he approached a pro-Palestine demonstration on 13 April in the Aldwych area of London.
Mr. Falter is reported to have said that his interactions with police officers “show that the Met believes that being openly Jewish will antagonise the anti-Israel marchers and that Jews need protection, which the police cannot guarantee. Instead of addressing that threat of antisemitic violence, the Met’s policy instead seems to be that law-abiding Jewish Londoners should not be in the parts of London where these marches are taking place. In other words, that they are no-go zones for Jews.”
We are writing to disagree strongly with these claims. This is because throughout his interactions with the police we were standing only a few yards away from him, yet we experienced nothing but warmth and solidarity from the pro-Palestine demonstrators and not a hint of antisemitism.
Our group was “openly Jewish” in that we all wore placards saying that, as descendants of Holocaust survivors, we oppose the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Indeed, one of us, Stephen Kapos, is a child survivor of the Holocaust who wasinterviewed by Sky News and the BBC’s Leigh Milner at the time.
Every major pro-Palestine demonstration in London has included a large Jewish bloc which has received nothing but support and warmth from their fellow demonstrators. Claims that these protests are no-go zones for Jews are completely untrue.
Haim Bresheeth (son of two survivors of Auschwitz),
Mark Etkind (son of a survivor of the Lodz ghetto and Buchenwald)
Stephen Kapos (survivor of the Holocaust in Budapest)
Peter Kapos (son of a Holocaust survivor)
Yosefa Loshitzky (daughter of survivors of the Holocaust in Poland)
For the past two years, Stephen Kapos has spoken at both of our Holocaust Memorial Day commemorations.
It is no surprise that when Ben Jamal mentioned the presence of thousands of Jews on the march, including the Jewish bloc, Falter refused to continue the interview. Zionists like him can’t face the fact that many Jews do not support genocide and the murder of children by the Nazi-style mass assassination factories of Israel.
Falter ducks debate with Ben Jamal as he is thrown by references to anti-Zionist/anti-racist Jews
The Guardian noted that
Met insiders were apparently dubious that Falter had been out merely for a stroll and just happened across the march. Falter has said he had been walking in the capital after attending synagogue and was not there to counter-protest.
Falter was filmed on the north and south sides of Aldwych in different encounters with officers. In one video on the north side, he said he wanted to “carry on my way” and was asked how many people were with him. He said he was waiting for a couple of friends.
In another, on the south side, he said he wanted to walk on the north side. An officer says he had already been seen “walking against the march”
Falter’s purpose was to provoke an incident and then spin it as anti-Semitic. When a Policeman said that he was ‘openly Jewish’ what he meant was that he openly supported Israel. Unfortunately the Police have imbibed, as I said in a previous blog, the idea that the marches pose a threat to Jews. The officer’s remarks were therefore logical given what they have been told rather than anti-Semitic.
If Falter had been a Muslim and tried to walk into a Zionist march the Police wouldn’t have spent 13 minutes arguing with him and simply pushed him back when he tried to push past. He’d have been arrested.
On a previous demonstration the Police interposed themselves between the Jewish bloc and the rest of the march because they believed them to be in danger! This is the product of the media equation of being Jewish and supporting Israel. They cannot handle the fact that thousands of Jews today are anti-Zionist and opposed to the existence of a racist, apartheid ‘Jewish’ state.
The Campaign Against Antisemitism
The CAA was founded in the summer of 2014 during Operation Protective Edge when 2,200 Palestinians died, including 550 children.
The CAA was founded at the instigation of Israel’s dirty tricks Ministry of Strategic Affairs. Its mission was to portray opposition to Israel’s attacks on Gaza as motivated by anti-Semitism.
Falter, who chairs the CAA, is a board member of the Jewish National Fund UK. The JNF has a long history of supporting ethnic cleansing in Palestine. An openly racist organisation, it controls 93% of Israeli land which is off limits to Israel’s Palestinian population.
In its entry on the Charity Commission website JNF-UK stated that:
THE OBJECTS ARE THE RELIEF OF POVERTY, AND THE FURTHERANCE OF ANY OTHER PURPOSES WHICH ARE CHARITABLE ACCORDING TO ENGLISH LAW, WITHIN THE STATE OF ISRAEL AS CONSTITUTED FROM TIME TO TIME, ESPECIALLY SUCH CHARITABLE PURPOSES AS BENEFIT PERSONS OF JEWISH RELIGION, RACE OR ORIGIN
The CAA only became a charity because the Charity Commission at the time was headed by Islamaphobic bigot William Shawcross. In 2012, as Director of the Henry Jackson Society, Shawcross said:
Europe and Islam is one of the greatest, most terrifying problems of our future. I think all European countries have vastly, very quickly growing Islamic populations
That is why the many complaints which had been made against the CAA for being a political organisation have been rejected. Its aim between 2015-19 was to remove Corbyn as Labour Leader.
Falter has become ever more hysterical at the support that the Palestinians in Gaza have received from people. Falter even called for the ‘home secretary to trigger draconian powers and even send in the army to “uphold the values that our country stands for”.
Falter forgot that he wasn’t in Israel where bringing in the army is quite normal to prevent Palestinians demonstrating! The total number of people who have taken part in the London marches, is probably in the region of 2-3 million. What irks Falter and the CAA is that millions of people are repelled by Israel’s continued genocidal attacks on defenceless Palestinians. War crimes are not popular.
Opinion polls have consistently shown that over 70% of British people support an immediate ceasefire and oppose Britain selling arms to Israel.
The only support that Israel has received is from the British Establishment. Nowhere was this more evident than in Sunak’s panicked reaction to George Galloway’s victory in the Rochdale by-election when he dashed out of Downing Street to froth about mobs roaming the streets and Jewish children afraid to walk the streets.
If we had a genuine media in this country as opposed to a prostitute press, then the obvious question to ask would be why Sunak and Braverman have expended so much effort in demonising refugees coming to Britain and devising the ludicrously expensive Rwanda scheme whilst at the same time bleating on about ‘anti-Semitism’.
The CAA has specialised in targeting anyone who opposes Zionism and the Israeli state, in particular Jewish people. Since 2014 the CAA had produced an ‘anti-Semitism barometer’ telling us how anti-Semitism is increasing in Britain. Despite everything they found that anti-Semitism was more common on the right than the left. As their 2017 Anti-Semitism Barometer concluded:
‘Supporters of left-wing political parties and ‘remainers’ are less likely to be antisemitic than those on the right or supporters of the ‘leave’ camp’.
Daniel Allington – King’s College’s Fake Academic
It therefore decided to invent a new measure of anti-Semitism which was signed off by academic-for-hire Daniel Allington of King’s College, London who was willing to prostitute himself and King’s by producing bogus ‘research’ that would fit the CAA’s predetermined conclusions that anti-Semitism was a left-wing problem.
What the CAA needed was to invent a set of questions that would ‘prove’ that it is the Left who are the real anti-Semites. Step forward Allington who was more than willing to use his academic credentials to ‘prove’ that the far-Right was really benevolent to Jews.
- From 2015 to 2018 the CAA used Yougov to ask a series of statements that were allegedly anti-Semitic in order to show that the level of anti-Semitism was high in Britain. They were:
1. “British Jewish people chase money more than other British people.”
2. “Having a connection to Israel makes Jewish people less loyal to Britain than other British people.”
3. “Jewish people consider themselves to be better than other British people.”
4. “Compared to other groups, Jewish people have too much power in the media.”
5. “Jewish people talk about the Holocaust just to further their political agenda.” or in 2015 “Jews talk about the Holocaust too much in order to get sympathy.”
6. “Jewish people can be trusted just as much as other British people in business.” or in 2015 “In business, Jews are not as honest as most people.”
7. “I am just as open to having Jewish friends as I am to having friends from other sections of British society” or in 2015 “I would be unhappy if a family member married a Jew.”
It is arguable that a majority of these statements are not anti-Semitic since there is a factual basis to them. But even if some people believe such generalisations about Jews, it doesn’t mean they are hostile to Jews, which is the classic way of understanding anti-Semitism.
Commenting on these questions Anshel Pfeffer wrote in Ha’aretz that:
take for example the statement that “Jews think they are better than other people.” Of course it’s not the thing that one should normally be caught saying in public – but is it anti-Semitic? For a start, many Jews do subscribe to the Jewish notion of “the chosen people,” and for that matter it’s not only Jews; members of many if not most nations, religions and ethnicities believe they are better than the others. That’s natural and normal national pride. Even if this view runs counter to liberal orthodoxy, believing that Jews think of themselves that way can certainly be a fair and honest assessment.
The same can be said of another of the survey’s statements: “Jews talk about the Holocaust too much in order to get sympathy.” That’s a rather nasty accusation but the fact is too many Jews, both political leaders in public appearances and ordinary Jews on social media, are often too quick to bring up the Holocaust in order to make a point. The sad truth is that many Jews have cheapened the memory of the Holocaust by using it in an inappropriate fashion. Holding that opinion doesn’t necessarily make you an anti-Semite.
Pfeffer accused the CAA of an ‘eagerness to see the anti-Semitism in Britain, which inarguably exists, as much more widespread than it really is’. There are no prizes for guessing why.
About the ‘finding’ that 56% of British Jews agree that “the recent rise in anti-Semitism in Britain has some echoes of the 1930s.” Pfeffer wrote that
‘If the majority of British Jews and the authors of the CAA report actually believe that, then it’s hard to take anything they say about contemporary anti-Semitism in their home country seriously.’
He went on to say that
‘To compare today’s Britain, for all its faults, with the Jews’ situation in 1930s exhibits a disconnect from reality which borders on hysteria.’
In 2018 the CAA employed Allington to fix their Antisemitism Barometer. In 2018 it still concluded that anti-Semitism was more prevalent on the right than left. The problem was what to do about this? Allington added 6 new questions with the sole intention of skewing the results. Allington embarked on what can only be called an act of academic fraud. His ‘research’ valueless. He decided what his conclusions were first and fitted the ‘evidence’ around them.
The 2019 Antisemitism Barometer was the first to show that ‘anti-Semitic views were most widespread on the far-left.’
What had changed in one year? Had people on the left and right suddenly changed their opinions? Was there really a shift in peoples’ attitudes to Jews? Of course not. All that happened was that under the guidance of two dishonest academics – Allington and David Hirsh – the CAA had added a new set of 6 questions, all of which were to do with Israel not anti-Semitism. They were:
- 1. Israel and its supporters are a bad influence on our democracy.”
- 2. Israel can get away with anything because its supporters control the media.”
- 3. Israel treats the Palestinians like the Nazis treated the Jews.”
- 4. I am comfortable spending time with people who openly support Israel.”
- 5. Israel makes a positive contribution to the world.”
- 6. Israel is right to defend itself against those who want to destroy it.”
The fraudulent nature of these questions is immediately obvious. They have nothing at all to do with Jews but with a racist state that calls itself ‘Jewish’. The CAA conceded that Question 5 had nothing to do with anti-Semitism but they added it anyway
‘Although… not antisemitic in itself, analysis showed that it was in fact a very good predictor of a respondent’s responses to other statements and therefore a good indicator of anti-Zionist antisemitic attitudes in general.’
Question number 4 is particularly egregious. I didn’t find myself comfortable spending time with supporters of Apartheid in South Africa or indeed racists generally. Did this make me a racist? I would be equally unhappy spending time with defenders of General Pinochet in Chile. Does that make me anti-Chilean? Perhaps not liking spending time with Nazis means you are an anti-German racist.
You can see where equating Israel with a Jew leads. Question 6 says that if you don’t accept Israel’s ‘right to defend itself against those who want to destroy it’ you are anti-Semitic. This assumes that Israel is the victim whereas today it is clear that Israel is a genocidal state.
On the basis of Allington’s ‘research’ the CAA concluded that:
‘Among the very left-wing, 42% believe that Israel’s supporters are damaging British democracy, and 60% believe that Israel treats the Palestinians like the Nazis treated the Jews, which directly evokes one of the examples of antisemitism in the International Definition of Antisemitism.’
By Quoting Israel’s First Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion Jackie Walker Became a Holocaust Denier!
Deceit and dishonesty are programmed into the CAA’s DNA and Falter is their Dr Strangelove. The CAA will therefore print the most outrageous lies if that serves its purposes. Anything and everything in the hands of the CAA can be distorted into becoming anti-Semitic.
A vivid example of this was on 7 February 2017 when the CAA put up a post “Jackie Walker posts text asking whether Hitler can really be blamed for the Holocaust“. The opening sentence of their post said that it ‘leaves open the possibility that he was justified.’
Linger over those last few weasel words, ‘leaves open the possibility’ hint, hint, nudge, nudge. She didn’t actually say it but we all know that she meant to say!
Jackie Walker was the Black-Jewish activist who was expelled from the Labour Party after having been targeted repeatedly by the racist Jewish Labour Movement.
Jackie Walker was the ideal target. She was Black. Even worse, she claimed to be Jewish when every Zionist knows that is impossible.
You may think that the CAA would have difficulty with the following quote. However that is to underestimate the skills of the CAA.
Any normal person would ask how on earth anyone could conclude from the above that Hitler was not responsible for the Holocaust.
Unfortunately for the CAA the quote was from Nahum Goldmann’s The Jewish Paradox – A Personal Memoir 1978 p.99. Goldmann was a former President of the World Jewish Congress and World Zionist Organisation! Goldmann was quoting directly from David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel.
Like most Zionists the CAA knows nothing about the history of Zionism except that which they are spoonfed. The quote is included in the Wikipedia entry on David Ben-Gurion. See my blog at the time
Of course the CAA deleted the post when they realised their mistake but not before it had been widely distributed and commented upon by people like Jack Mendel, a Jewish News ‘journalist’. Dishonesty pervades everything the CAA touches. It is a Midas touch in reverse.
When you live in a permanent haze of Zionist propaganda and lies, nothing seems real. It is a wilderness of mirrors. The CAA are no more interested in eradicating genuine anti-Semitism than Rishi Sunak is in redistributing wealth. The CAA have no case for remaining a charity. They provide absolutely no public benefit and nor are their purposes charitable.
Dishonesty and plain old-fashioned lying are their main attributes. That they are treated as a serious organisation by the mainstream media is testament to the inability of organisations like the BBC to investigate who they are dealing with. Britain’s rabid tabloid press is more than happy to take these imposters at their word.
How the CAA Manipulates Statistics
As a Zionist organisation the CAA believes that the ‘real home’ of Jews is in Israel, not Britain. This is what Netanyahu told French Jews after the murder of 4 Jews in 2015. The CAA therefore conducted an unscientific poll of British Jews in order ‘prove’ that most Jews were thinking about leaving Britain for Israel. It found that:
58% of Jews believed that they had no future in Europe.
More than half of British Jews feel that antisemitism now echoes the 1930s
- 1 in 4 British Jews has considered leaving the country in the past two years because of rising antisemitism.
- 45% of Jews questioned feel their family is threatened by Islamist extremism.
- 77% of Jews questioned have witnessed antisemitism disguised as a political comment about Israel.
- 84% of Jews consider boycotts of businesses selling Israeli products to be intimidation &
- 82% say that media bias against Israel fuels persecution of Jews in Britain.
These were loaded questions. Contrast this with a rigorously controlled, academic survey of the British Jewish community by the Department of Sociology at City University (November 2015). This found that nearly a quarter, 24%, of British Jews supported sanctions to bring about a peace settlement. There was a ‘sizeable minority’ supporting sanctions (34%-41%) among the young, the highly qualified academically and those who are not affiliated to a synagogue). The survey even found that whilst 59% identify as a Zionist nearly a third, 31%, didn’t see themselves as Zionists.
Even the Jewish Chronicle poured cold water on the CAA’s ‘findings’ with its own Survation poll. Some 88% of British Jews stated that they had no intention of emigrating. Jewish Chronicle 14.1.15.
The CAA poll was junk but it served its purpose, which was to whip up fears of anti-Semitism among Jews. Zionist organisations see their goal as ‘helping’Jewish people to emigrate to Israel.
The CAA’s Islamaphobia
Under the title Profile of British Muslim Antisemitism the CAA published a highly racist and offensive cartoon of a typical Muslim male. It has since deleted it. Islamaphobia is an integral part of Zionism. One of the campaign’s stated objectives is to “promote racial harmony.” In practice, its activities are designed to achieve the exact opposite. The CAA consistently targets Muslims.
“Littered with flaws”
The CAA published a report in 2016 on “British Muslim anti-Semitism.” (also deleted). It included a ‘profile’ of the kind of person that the campaign was targeting. The profile was highly racist. According to the CAA, the typical Muslim anti-Semite was likely to be a first-generation immigrant and living in public housing.
If someone had posted a similar portrayal of Jews, the CAA would have been the first to claim “anti-Semitism.” The report alleged that “many British Muslims reserve a special hatred for British Jews.”
“On every single count, British Muslims were more likely by far than the general British population to hold deeply anti-Semitic views,” it added.
The conclusions were based on a poll conducted for Channel 4. Yet even the Community Security Trust, a staunchly pro-Israel group, raised doubts about the conclusions which the CAA drew.
In a blog post for the CST, Dave Rich wrote:
“This latest poll showed something else that is interesting, and is not specific to Muslims: that people who believe anti-Semitic things about Jews rarely think of themselves as anti-Semitic.”
“What is perhaps curious, though, is that this is not reflected in a more basic question that was asked in the same poll about how favorable or unfavorable Muslims feel towards Jewish people as a religious group,”
Asked what their feelings were towards Jews: on a sliding scale from 0-100 – where 0 is the least favourable, British Muslims scored 57.1. This hardly suggests rampant anti-Semitism.
The CAA specialises in distorting statistics. In its annual “anti-Semitism barometer” report for 2015, it claimed that an opinion poll showed that “almost half (45 percent) of British adults believe at least one of the anti-Semitic statements shown to them to be true.”
The questions were carefully chosen to elicit the required answers. One statement was that “Jews’ loyalty to Israel makes them less loyal to Britain than other British people.” Is it surprising that one in five people believe this given that Jewish anti-Zionists are regularly accused of being “traitors”?
Clearly many Zionists believe that their first loyalty is to Israel. In 2013 Israel’s ministries for foreign affairs and immigrant absorption distributed a questionnaire to American Jews asking where their loyalties would lie in the event of a crisis between the two countries.
In January 2015 the Institute for Jewish Policy Research in London found that the CAA’s “barometer” report was “littered with flaws” and the group’s work “may even be rather irresponsible.”
The IJPR criticized the way that the CAA had used data collected by YouGov to make the “rather sensationalist claim that almost half of all British adults harbor some sort of anti-Semitic view.” YouGov had been commissioned to undertake the poll by the CAA.
According to the IJPR,
a far more accurate and honest read” of the data would “highlight the fact that between 75 percent and 90 percent of people in Britain either do not hold anti-Semitic views or have no particular view of Jews either way, and only about 4 percent to 5 percent of people can be characterized as clearly anti-Semitic.
In 2009 Foreign Office diplomat Rowan Laxton was accused by Falter of having shouted out, whilst exercising by himself in a gym, ‘fucking Israelis, fucking Jews’ after having seen on a TV screen footage of an elderly Palestinian man killed by Israel in Gaza.
Laxton, who is High Commissioner to the Republic of Cameroon, was prosecuted under s.5 of the Public Order Act for using ‘threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour …’ in a public place. The Police were not inclined to prosecute at first but Falter leaked it to the Daily Mail and put the Police under pressure. Laxton was convicted by Westminster Magistrates Court and was then suspended by the Foreign Office.
Laxton appealed to Southwark Crown Court who acquitted him of using the phrase ‘fucking Jews’. In other words Gideon Falter was a liar who had tried to ruin someone’s career for expressing their emotions about an Israeli attack on Gaza which killed 1400 civilians. The death of Palestinians is not something which disturbs Falter in the slightest. As Professor Geoffrey Pullum noted in The diplomat, the bishop, the bomber, and the fruit bat the Daily Mail which reported the initial conviction did not report Laxton’s successful appeal.
Tony Greenstein
